Anyway, yes to an extent and in certain areas it can be effective especially if the propaganda a) confirms a certain state of mind and b) aims an audience with no capacity and practice of critical thinking.

In Turkmenistan, for instance, it is well possible that part of the population –especially younger kids and teenagers who do not know any better– has been brainwashed. And in places like Tashkent, there are many people, members of ethnic-confessional minorities and russianised-westernised urban Uzbeks in particular, who do buy into the propaganda jingle that the Taliban and Wahhabis will take over the country if Karimov is overthrown.

On the ohter hand, do not be mistake. People in the region may pay lip service to this or that line and censor themselves for teh sake of their own safety, they are not stupid and not as fooled as one thinks. On top of that, in today’s global reality where people are socially mobile, (neo-)Soviet propaganda approaches are less and less effective and sustainable.

“I’m sorry but i don’t quite get it; i think these “circumstances” are povided by certain “things” and “people”.”

Yes. I do not claim the opposite. What I do say is that they are rarely the result of a master plan but often unexpected or unplanned. Take the labor migration again. What has played a role?

1) the collapse of the Soviet colonial economy and the civil war; 2) structural poverty enhanced by extreme corruption and neo-feudalism; 3) demographic pressure and land shortage; 4) economic growth in Russia or at least certain enclaves and regions there, combined with a demograpic/labor deficit; 5) the presence of an ex-colonial language (Russian) that remained the regional lingua franca.

When I talked about ‘a natural phenomenon’, I did not meant anything biological of physics, no, I mean but that things moved the way they moved beacuse a number of factors converged/coincided even if nobody planned they would.

I’m sorry but i don’t quite get it; i think these “circumstances” are povided by certain “things” and “people”. The “thing” in this case which caused the migration of labourers to Russia is the lack of jobs which in turn is the cause of the inefficiency of the regime’s politics.

And remember after all - Ataman - that in this case we are talking about masses. Masses DO tend to become affected by propaganda created by certain people and/or political/religious parties and people. I think if it was how you describe it - the term “propaganda” would never have been created.

Thanks for your definition of “social mobility”. I agree with you. These changes are fundamental in radical mentality change.

Bwah Darud, mentalities are not changed by somebody or something. They evolve. At the end of the day, many of these processes start not because you, me, the Communist Party or the Padishah want it, but by a convergence of circumstances and factors that are under no-ones’ control (very un-Soviet that is ). Take the labor migration. Was that a government policy to send people to Russia? No. It was a natural flow.

OK regarding you question about what social mobility is… There are sociological definitions of it. But in the field (which is what interests me most of all) what I see as social mobility is that people’s social enviroment changes, often abruptly so (USSR collapse, ‘transition’, etc.). That makes them mobile, most often when they try to cope with those changes: a) horizontally mobile (eg. rural-urban migration, seasonal work abroad) and well as b) vertically mobile (eg. impoverishment/enrichment, change of occupation, access to new media, people’s intellectual status that does not match social-financial status; etc.). In turn, that leads to a) erosion of traditional cultural frameworks (Soviet-cum-traditionalist) and leaves a cultural void which has to be filled; b) new expectations/ambitions and, unavoidably, frustrations. It is a) and b) that set things moving.

Note that I do not use the word ‘culture’ for art and folklore (which is what most people limit it to), but for mentality, norms and values and ways of social organisation.

“Look at Iran; they killed the Shah coz he was bad, now they’re complaining from the mullahs. They were complaining about freedom of speech, now ALL press and TV is censored.”

Well, they installed an Islamic state which is NOT the way and to which I am 500% opposed. BWT, the revolutionaries did not killed Pahlavi nor his family. He died in exile of a cancer that he already had.

“but i think that you are idealising the role of modern islam here.”

No I don’t (well I know that some think that I actually have radical wolf-in-sheepskin agenda but OK that is more amusing than irritating to me). Believe me, if I say what I say on this forum it is not because of some woolly idealistic tralala, but because I am confident about it after having worked and lived for years in the region and returned regularly since.

Those who believe that they can graft ‘Western’/liberal concepts in the regions and expect that the CAsians will thank them for it, *they* are naïve.

“Are you sure it was because you did not drink? That is really strange. Could it be that the guy did not like your haircut or the way you talk”

Strange but very true my friend (it was not in Taj but another Stan btw but still it’s regional) and it has happend to others too. Hm after thorough examination, I have to conclude that it was probably my haircut–or rather the complete lack thereof since there’s little left to cut.

May i ask you the source? Or if you wrote it yourself?

I really admire presidents who ban everything which “irritates” them. Such a strong presidency who can represent the country’s “irritation” for golden teeth. It’s admirable.:)

That was exactly what i meant; we could say that you were educated in a sense 10 years ago, but u decided to quit and get superior education, that was my notion of developing - education. Trust me, with this level of literacy in TJ, anyone working in such a place is “educated”. That’s where ambition starts, doesn’t it? I didn’t get it: did u dissent or assent? This was a reply to Ataman’s famous “becuzzz they arrrre educated”.

The thing i want to say is - Ataman - investing in Tajikistan and creating assets does not benefit Tajikistan so long as it is not creating jobs for the tajiks, or if the tajiks cannot have access to these jobs. Take for instance in 10 years with this low quality of education, if Iran for instance agrees to complete the Rogun dam, this is a huge investment which can feed the WHOLE nation. If the engineers working the damn are all iranians, how can we call this development, or how can we say that we tajiks are benefiting from this?

“Therefore — and I don’t say this as an easy way out — I think on the mid- to long term it’s more a matter of social mobility and attached mentality change. Some of these processes will actually run by themselves. What we are talking about here (the celebrations etc.) are practices and mindsets that belong to what one could call ‘Soviet-coopted traditionalism’: a mixture of (eno-)Sovietism and (often re-invented) traditions.”

Social mobility and attached mentality change? How can you change that? It is only with rational thinking that these types of mentalities are liable to change. Now i wonder where this rational thinking comes from…

I think that if we track corruption and bring about a right political regime which is unified throughout the country and is fair and just, with the fiscality which is going into the pockets of certain people, i think we are able to give more salaries to teachers than the mere 20 bucks a month, these teachers with proper salaries now will think twice before accepting a bribe and the education standards will gradually improve.

Your notion of “social mobility” is very vague, and changing the mentality of someone is virtually impossible on a large scale concerning a society. You may be able to brainwash a guy and change his mentality, but you can’t do that to every single person in the country - unless - you’re a dictator. Let’s wish you’re not Ataman.

“That is eroding ‘Soviet-coopted traditionalism’, which will leave a void and will be filled with that very element of CAsian culture that is, at the same time, part of a wider global sphere. These are fields where more Islam (provided its non-traditionalist) definitely bring a lot of benefit to the society”

Religion in this case…Name me one non-propagandist, non-traditionalist modernist religious/political organization which has been able to overcome political and economic crisis in a country.

Religious/political organizations are usually found with good and human reasons to help and protect people and establish equality, but with their growth and involvment in politics and in power, they tend to disintegrate from the very reason and belief they originated from. They tend to become conservative-propagandist regimes. Look at Iran; they killed the Shah coz he was bad, now they’re complaining from the mullahs. They were complaining about freedom of speech, now ALL press and TV is censored. I’ve said it before - religion and politics don’t just give the right cake.

I know Ataman that that is not what you meant - having a islamic regime but rather the modernist islam spread among people, but i think that you are idealising the role of modern islam here. I think we have to stick to the reality and see simply what will work and what not. People in the CA have already had an experience of Islam - which has been so far - traditionalist/propaganda. They just can’t easily “understand” your notion of modernist Islam. These two words just doesn’t go together in one phrase for them.

“By the way, “excessive spending” is also a feature of funerals in TJ. If someone dies mullahs make people spend thousands of dollars to feed hundreds of clueless/ignorant musafeds every friday of the week, 40 days and every year after the death of the person.

I take it this is classified as “spending money on more fundamental things”? ” ——LOL (so true)

“Second, isn’t it easy to blame society (social pressure and what not)for your failures to live the life you want? I do not believe in this “people-are-hostage-of-their-societal-obligations” BS. Especially in TJ. If you don’t have money you don’t have a wedding. If you want to have a wedding, you work for it. ”

Now the peer pressure and feeling obligated to throw a wedding with “dagh-dagha” (feels good to use tajik expressions every once in a while ) is true to a certain extent - i have seen it up close. But let’s just not go to extremes.

Ataman - it’s true - noone will beat you up if you refuse to drink.
Tajik boy - we can’t say this feeling of obligations and peer pressure is completely ignorable.

You guys are both right to a certain extent, but not completely. Tajiks do feel these social obligations and the feeling of shame they have when they fail to have their lavish parties and “obroo” they lose in front of “dar-u-hamsoya”. But - they can face it too. They can be logical and think about the winter - to an extent. Or they can “se foutre” and throw the party. Thats my notion of democracy - to be able to choose what you want to do - in the worstestest of conditions.